XXD as an upgrade to 400D

I know there have been posts of similar ilk before but i would like to ask about my particular situation.

I'm looking for an upgrade from the 400D to the XXD (40 or 50) range as im feeling i would appreciate some of the additional features of the XXD range (better AF, ergonomics, better high ISO etc).

My main types of photography are Landscapes (yeah i know 5D would be ideal here), sports (motorsport), Airshows, with the occasional portrait and concert thrown in.

My issue is that the 50D is currently £300ish dearer than the 40D but im wondering if buying the 40 is worthwhile as it is already 12-18 months old.

I know the bodies are a significant upgrade on what i currently have but i would like feedback from people who have made the upgrade to 40D or 50D to comment on any drawbacks they found or any particular highlights on each that i might not know.

Image quality wise there is not a big difference between the 400 and the 40, maybe none. Ergonomics though is a different story. But if your looking to upgrade, I'd go with the 50D. It is a substantial upgrade from the 400.

I bought a used, one-year-old 40D a few months ago, as an upgrade from my XTi (400D), and am very happy with my decision. I did this specifically because I'm shooting more sports and action these days, and wanted the better FPS and AF capabilities of the XXD series. However, budget was an important factor, and I couldn't justify the cost of a new 50D (almost twice as much as I paid for my used 40D).

My images didn't improve as a result of the upgrade, but my keeper rate at sports events improved considerably. The 40D seems to perform much better with moving subjects than the XTi. I also prefer the layout of the 40D. It's much easier to change settings quickly (especially exposure/flash compensation, which I use constantly). One unexpected bonus was the much-improved viewfinder - it's a whole lot easier to see your settings through the viewfinder. The 40D also produces better results at high ISOs (e.g. indoor sports events), and I prefer the overall "feel" of the camera.

My conclusion: If I could have afforded the 50D, I would have bought it for the micro-adjustment feature. However, I'm thrilled with my 40D, and feel it's a camera that I can enjoy for many years. Unusually for me, I haven't second-guessed my decision to buy it; it's everything I hoped for, and more. If budget is an important consideration, go for it. You're unlikely to regret it.

IQ is similar when comparing the 40D and 400D. The 40D has a much better design and build, feels comfortable to hold even without a battery grip (unlike the 400D, which I have). You'll definitely like the increase FPS rate if you ever shoot any sports or action (The Wife got a 50D a few months back). The one thing that isn't mentioned much is the different control layout between the Rebel line and the rest of Canon's offerings. The shift from buttons to control wheel takes a good bit of getting used to. It's not a switch that's intuitive, but not as jarring as moving to Nikon or somesuch.